GUSKEY@.UKY.EDU

See also: Education Digest, 2001, 66(5), 25-28. NewsLine, 2001, 9(2), 12-13.

Most of us can recall depressing experiences with tests from our years as students. One of the most notable for me occurred during my sophomore year in high school. I spent hours studying in preparation for a test that was to be a major portion of my grade in a particular course. I entered class on the day of the test feeling confident that my preparation was adequate. As the teacher handed out the test and I read through it, however, a slow panic overcame me. “Oh my gosh,” I thought, “This isn’t what I studied!” Despite my many hours of preparation, I did poorly on the test and received a low course grade.

This experience taught me two things. First, it taught me that in certain high school classes, hard work and effort really don’t pay off. Neither my hours of preparation nor what I had learned were reflected in my test score. Given the nature of that test, I probably could have attained a comparable score with only a fraction of the preparation time.

The second thing this experience taught me is that some high school teachers couldn’t be trusted. Doing well in their courses wasn’t determined by how much I learned. It was determined instead by how well I could anticipate what they would ask on tests. The key to a high grade, therefore, was not to study what I perceived as important or even to study what was stressed in the text. The key was to guess what that particular teacher thought was important.

From that point on, I succeeded in my classes to the degree I was able to out-guess my teachers. I learned their game and I played it well. Occasionally my efforts were thwarted by teachers who took pride in their ability to out-guess their students. Their tests were “gotcha” experiences that brought resignation to some students and frustration to all. I presumed they did this because it had been done to them. It was their unconscious way of passing on a hollow tradition that seemed based on the adage “I bled for mine, so you, too, should bleed.”

Happily, practices such as these are rarer today. As we’ve worked to improve the quality of teaching in high school classes, we’ve also become more thoughtful about the way we prepare tests and assessments. Students today are seldom “surprised” by the questions asked, and most judge the tests and assessments their teachers administer to be fair measures of what they have learned. The best tests and assessments actually facilitate students’ learning. They provide students with essential feedback on their learning progress, help them identify their learning problems, and occasionally offer guidance and direction to students in correcting those problems (Bloom, Madaus, & Hastings, 1981).

Despite these improvements, however, an important aspect of assessment remains ignored by most high school teachers. In addition to serving as a vehicle for offering students feedback on their learning, classroom assessments also serve as vital tools for improving the quality of teaching. They help teachers identify what was taught well and what areas need refinement or revision. To use classroom assessments for this purpose, however, teachers must view the results from their assessments in very different ways.

Analyzing Assessment Results

An easy but effective way to gain evidence from tests and assessments for improving teaching is to conduct a simple analysis of each test item or each criterion used in evaluating a paper, performance, or demonstration. This can be done by just tallying how many students missed each item or failed to meet a particular criterion. Special attentions should be paid to those items or criteria missed by half or more of the students in the class. These identify the trouble spots.

The first thing to consider in such cases is the quality of the item or criterion itself. In other words, the teacher must determine if the problem rests with the test or assessment. Perhaps the question is ambiguously worded. Perhaps the criterion is unclear. Perhaps students misinterpreted what the teacher wanted. Whatever the case, teachers must look carefully at those items or criteria to see if they adequately address the knowledge, understanding, or skill they intended to measure.

If no obvious problems are found with the item or criterion, then teachers must be willing to turn to their teaching. If half the students in a class miss a clear and concise question on a concept that was taught, then apparently that concept wasn’t taught very well. Whatever strategy was used, whatever examples were employed, or whatever explanation was offered, it simply didn’t work. When half the students in the class answer a question incorrectly or fail to meet a particular criterion, it’s not a student learning problem ? it’s a teaching problem.

Analyzing test or assessment results in this way means setting aside some powerful ego issues. Teachers’ initial response to items or criteria missed by the majority of students is often, “Well, I taught them. They just didn’t learn it!” But on further reflection, most recognize that effectiveness in teaching is not defined by what they do as teachers. Rather, it is defined by what their students are able to do. If few students learned what was taught, could we really say that the teaching was effective? Can effective teaching take place in the absence of learning?

Renowned educator Ralph W. Tyler (1949) argued that it could not. Tyler maintained that suggesting “I taught them, they just didn’t learn it,” was as foolish as saying, “I sold it to them, they just didn’t buy it.” Imagine how ridiculous it would sound for a coach to say, “I taught this fellow how to swim. It’s not my fault if each time he jumps in the water he still sinks.” To Tyler, the best and most defensible criterion of teaching effectiveness is student learning. If few students learn, Tyler argued, how could anyone reasonably contend that effective teaching had occurred?

Predicting What Works

Many teachers are astonished to learn that they can be poor judges of predicting what worked and what didn’t work in their teaching. Even in my own teaching, I find that I am often taken by surprise. There have been times when I thought my presentations in class were truly inspired. My delivery was animated, my examples clear, and my insights truly incisive. At the conclusion of the class I regretted that I wasn’t being observed or that we didn’t have video cameras in place, for it was truly one of my finest hours. Later I ask a question on a test or assessment about the ideas or concepts I introduced during that sterling presentation, and few students answer correctly. After squelching the initial impulse to blame my students, I realize that it is I who must make some changes.

Some might argue that such a perspective puts too much responsibility on teachers and not enough on the students. Don’t students’ have significant responsibilities in this process? Especially at the high school level, shouldn’t students be expected to display initiative and personal accountability? And besides, “if they don’t get it, that’s their fault, not mine. I’m here to teach and they’re here to learn.”

Indeed, responsibility for learning is shared. Even with our most valiant teaching efforts, we cannot guarantee that all students will learn excellently. Rarely do teachers find a test item or assessment criterion that is answered correctly by every one of their students. There are always those students who don’t care enough or who are unwilling to put forth the necessary effort. Still, if a teacher is reaching less than half of the students in the class, the problem isn’t theirs; it’s the teachers.

Finding Ways to Improve

Gaining ideas on how to improve teaching once those trouble spots are identified can be difficult, especially if teachers believe they have to do it alone. Fortunately, they don’t. In every high school there are excellent teachers who do a great job of having their students learn well. These outstanding teachers are usually more than willing to share their strategies and techniques. Still, structured professional development opportunities for such reflection and collaboration must be put in place (Guskey, 1998, 2000). In addition, district level personnel offer a wonderful resource for ideas and practical advice. In most cases they are eager to provide assistance in the improvement efforts for any high school course. Collaborative partnerships with local colleges and universities offer yet another valuable resource.

So long as tests and assessments are used only as a means to document student achievement, one of their most powerful benefits will be missed. Tests and assessments are a teacher’s feedback too. They identify what worked well and what didn’t. As such, they allow teachers to identify their strengths, recognize their weaknesses, and then target efforts to improve the quality of their teaching.

Most importantly, using tests and assessments in this manner cannot be restricted to a once-a-year activity based on statewide assessment results. Instead, it must be done weekly, every time any form of classroom test or assessment is administered and scored. Using classroom tests and assessments in this way not only enhances the effectiveness of instructional efforts, it also improves the quality of teachers’ ongoing assessment methods. And, in the long run, it will help significantly improve student learning.

References

Bloom, B. S., Madaus, G. F., & Hastings, J. T. (1981). Evaluation to improve learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Guskey, T. R. (1998). Making time to train your staff. The School Administrator, 55(7), 35-37.

Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluating professional development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Tyler, R. W. (1949). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.